The W
Views: 95622615
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.4.07 2055
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - A funny quote, and a question about Iran Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1675 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (23 total)
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 568/1084
EXP: 2390157
For next: 71707

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2800 days
Last activity: 2797 days
#1 Posted on 29.3.03 0656.12
Reposted on: 29.3.10 0656.18
First, there's this story about Bush and Blair not liking what Pakistan had been up to. They released a statement saying "The differences can only be resolved through peaceful means and engagement."

Anyway, I heard on tv this morning Rumsfield saying something about Iran militias getting involved in the war. If this is the case, who are they fighting? I know that at that big Middle East conference a week or so ago, Iran of all people said that the Arab world should come to Iraq's defense, but I really can't imagine them actually doing it. It was a good laugh when Bush lumped Iran and Iraq together as part of the Axis of Evil (two-thirds, to be specific), but I just chalked it up to him being an idiot. Is there something going on there we don't know? Has all the talk of Iran reforming and trying to open relations with the West been nothing but lies from the liberal media? Or is this an example of what happens when a country goes into a war with damn near worldwide resistance?
Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 151

Posts: 2176/7534
EXP: 42814118
For next: 482458

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 291 days
Last activity: 291 days
#2 Posted on 29.3.03 1033.56
Reposted on: 29.3.10 1039.41
Iran actually has been a supporter of terrorist organizations longer than Iraq. The problem is that its a schizophrenic government, as the elected officials are 'moderate' but the fundamentalist clerics have greater power.
Plus, payback for 1979-80 against Iran would bring happiness to a segment of America.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1137/1759
EXP: 4825309
For next: 167561

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on 29.3.03 1438.59
Reposted on: 29.3.10 1456.28
Where do you get the idea that there is "damned near worldwide resistence?"

And since when are we beholden to the rest of the world?

A little note- each and every nation who opposes this war has something going with Iraq right now. Be it Russia's sales of military equipment, or France and Germany's sale of banned equipment, you are going to see egg on each and every one of the faces of those few nations that opposed this.

In addition- it would be TOTALLY foolish to open up and start a war with everyone else who engages in terrorist activites, all at once. Fighting terrorism is a big job, and it is going to take a while. And we are going to take care of these countries ONE AT A TIME. Of course they are going to say "can only be resolved peacefully" right now. If we aren't going to get around to pressuring them militarily for years, why in gods name would we give them a warning?

Why in the hell are those of you who are anti-Bush using the argument that he should bomb everyone who pisses us off to OPPOSE action in Iraq? Who would have ever thought that Democrats would be against the liberation of an oppressed, tortured, and starved people- especially with all of those useless "Free Tibet!" stickers out there...
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 67

Posts: 363/1136
EXP: 2563349
For next: 29537

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3561 days
Last activity: 3030 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 29.3.03 1810.04
Reposted on: 29.3.10 1810.22

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Where do you get the idea that there is "damned near worldwide resistence?"


Probably from the world-wide protests against this idiotic war.



    And since when are we beholden to the rest of the world?


Probably since we're... you know... a part of it? We don't exist in a vacuum, y'know.



    A little note- each and every nation who opposes this war has something going with Iraq right now. Be it Russia's sales of military equipment, or France and Germany's sale of banned equipment, you are going to see egg on each and every one of the faces of those few nations that opposed this.


Not likely. At least, no more than's already on our faces for doing such a bad job of coming up with a cover story for this little bit of action. After all, Britain and America have a whole hell of a lot "going on" with Iraq, too.



    Why in the hell are those of you who are anti-Bush using the argument that he should bomb everyone who pisses us off to OPPOSE action in Iraq? Who would have ever thought that Democrats would be against the liberation of an oppressed, tortured, and starved people- especially with all of those useless "Free Tibet!" stickers out there...


Wow, creative use of that broad, broad paintbrush there, pally.

I oppose Bush. Whole-heartedly. I don't think he should even be in office, as blatantly corrupt as his administration has demonstrated itself to be. And I'm of the opinion that dropping bombs on a people who already hate us a great deal is going to be, at best, useless. They already see us as corrupt, wealthy bullies. How does blowing the living shit out of them change that? All we're doing is giving the suicide bombers of the world more reason to want to strap on the last backpack they'll ever wear.
Gavintzu
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 266/443
EXP: 624737
For next: 35432

Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2679 days
Last activity: 2679 days
#5 Posted on 29.3.03 2042.04
Reposted on: 29.3.10 2053.44
Pool Boy sez:

    In addition- it would be TOTALLY foolish to open up and start a war with everyone else who engages in terrorist activites, all at once. Fighting terrorism is a big job, and it is going to take a while. And we are going to take care of these countries ONE AT A TIME.


Good news ... I did a little searching for you to save some time later on. Your local recruitment officer can be contacted at:

MISSION VIEJO RECRUITING STATION
US ARMY RECRUITING STATION
28231 MARGUERITE PARKWAY SUITE
MISSION VIEJO, CA 92692
949-347-0290

Be sure to post once in a while to let us all know how basic training went, and how the fighting in Damascus, Tehran, and Pyongyang goes. Of course, after all those wars have been fought, you will probably have to go storm Algiers, Cairo, Baghdad redux, Amman ... wow, lots of street fighting in your future.

Of course, this is assuming you want to actually live out your little imperialist fantasy, and not leave the actual fighting and dying and getting crippled to poor grunts who are stupid enough to enlist.

Edit: I could have worded the last sentence a little better. The men and women currently in the US Armed Forces are not stupid for enlisting ... it is the people who would enlist in the face of the huge world war Pool Boy is advocating who would be stupid. Just clarifying.




(edited by Gavintzu on 29.3.03 1847)
Jakegnosis
Morcilla
Level: 52

Posts: 253/645
EXP: 1072159
For next: 11689

Since: 26.7.02
From: Maine

Since last post: 2673 days
Last activity: 2657 days
#6 Posted on 30.3.03 0015.42
Reposted on: 30.3.10 0016.54

    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    I could have worded the last sentence a little better. The men and women currently in the US Armed Forces are not stupid for enlisting ... it is the people who would enlist in the face of the huge world war Pool Boy is advocating who would be stupid. Just clarifying.


Thanks ;-)

A lot of the grunts are ready to go the fuck home from this stupid war. They were told that the Iraqi people would be cheering for them, and that it was going to be a cakewalk.

Guess what....

Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1139/1759
EXP: 4825309
For next: 167561

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on 30.3.03 2043.43
Reposted on: 30.3.10 2052.55
When it gets to the point where my arms are needed to fight for this country, I will willingly enlist. It is utterly stupid to suggest that I should have no say or opinion in military activities because I did not follow in the footsteps of my ancesters (including a grandfather who was an Army Rager and more notably, General Pershing). We have more than enough VOLUNTEER soldiers right now that the very idea that the only way my pro-war stance holds water is if I enlist is offensive. If you want to look at it that way, my tax dollars pay for those cruise missiles, those soldiers salaries, those ships, those planes, and right now my productivity on the homefront is a lot more benificial to any war effort than my contribution as a soldier could possibly be at this point.

I also love how people are all of the sudden saying that "we were told this war would be a cakewalk," or "the Iraqis are NOT celebrating in the streets-" there fore the war is wrong. Where in god name are you getting that idea? We pulled off the fastest advance in military history. There HAVE been uprisings in several cities. There HAS been demonstrations by Iraqis in support of us. The only reason there are not more is that the Iraqi secrect damned police is holding guns to the heads of these people's families, saying "fight with us or they die."

So I am the evil one for advocating a "World War" to help millions of oppressed peoples worldwide. Just shows me the utter hypocricy of the so called "compassionate left." You can bitch and moan about the poor, the needy, and the oppressed, but when it comes down to it, you are much more inclined to sit on your fat, cheeseburger eating ass and leave these people to starve, be tortured and murdered because you are afraid of getting dirty. To you, everything is "diplomacy" and EVERYTHING can be accomplished be talking. I am all in favor of that, but sadly, that is not reality. Some times it gets to a point where you have to go in with guns blazing- and the people who don't realize that are the same people that are so cowardly that when diplomacy DOES fail, they are content with issuing proclamations with a wink and a nod and looking the other way. Disgusting.

You are so wrapped up in your petty partisain politics, you irrational hatred of Bush, your EGO that you can't possibly aknowlege the good that will come from this war. Thats fine. Go back to your boob tube and your couch, where CNN will tell you the miniscule amount of bad things that happen to our men and women fighting for these people (totally glossing over the overwhelming good that is being done) and keep on bitching, while the people who are willing to go beyond words and good intentions are out doing. You will have a lot to occupy yourselves then, since there will be so very much to whine about.

Protesters- sheesh. Of course, the rash of "Pro-war" protests are totally ignored. Then again, with such a small percentage of people protesting AT ALL, I wonder how it can be figured that "the majority of the world" is against this war, based on protests alone. Hey- Democrats love polls, why don't you look at those? Oh, yeah, because they don't agree with your assertions. Oh, too bad then...
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 570/1084
EXP: 2390157
For next: 71707

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2800 days
Last activity: 2797 days
#8 Posted on 30.3.03 2136.57
Reposted on: 30.3.10 2141.47
Are you insane? How can you say that the majority of the world supports this war?

The war was wrong before it took longer than we were told. It is just more wrong for those in favor of the war to have lied about how long it will take.

If we were really ready to go out with guns blazing and liberate the world, why did we wait until now? If the U.S. is really that altruistic, why did/does it support corrupt regimes throughout the world?

I don't see how you can think that "fighting terrorism" is going to stop it. All it does is add fuel to the fire. Islamic terrorists don't like us because of our (perceived or real, it doesn't matter either way) imperialist policies, so going out and invading a country because we don't like the guy in charge is not the way to do it. Furthermore, without explicitly stating it, you seem to imply that the war in Iraq has something to do with terrorism. Please explain. As pointed out millions of times, Iraq is a secualr government. He and Osmama have completely different views on how the world should work. If we wanted to invade countries for supporting terrorism, we should start with two of our biggest "allies" in the region, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The immensely corrupt Saudi government PAYS OFF TERRORIST GROUPS to keep them from fighting against them.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 300/518
EXP: 789829
For next: 33719

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 373 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#9 Posted on 30.3.03 2213.31
Reposted on: 30.3.10 2219.08

    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    Are you insane? How can you say that the majority of the world supports this war?

    The war was wrong before it took longer than we were told. It is just more wrong for those in favor of the war to have lied about how long it will take.




Lied to us? Lied to us? So the pro-war people can see the future now. I guess we all those anti-war people said that 100,000 Iraq civilians will die were LIEING to us too. Plus I would love the see the time Bush told us how long this war is going to take so I can see how you now this is taking longer than it should. I mean the war is more wrong because Bush said it will take more time.
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 398/763
EXP: 1411078
For next: 74859

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 394 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
#10 Posted on 31.3.03 0033.21
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0033.29
OK number one, not one politician or general went on TV or said on the record that this whole Iraq thing would be wrapped up in a week. It never happened. People need to realize that wars take TIME. People were spoiled by the Gulf War I and now they think that our military can work those kind of miracles in every armed conflict. But that is not the case, in reality this war is "short" if it lasts six months. The problem is that with this multi network 24 hour news coverage we have now, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox are reporting every single minute detail that paints this picture like "we should be finished with but we arent and heres why." This war is being over analyzed to death by bunch of talking heads and retired generals and admirals. Did some unexpected shit happen? hell yeah. But the people in charge of this expect the unexpected. Thats the business of making war.

And once again let me say that Osama Bin Laden and Al-Quaeda arent the ONLY terror organizations we are fighting in the war on terrorism. Maybe we wont ever see a picture of Osama and Saddam having a beer together but Saddam has been open of his support of terrorists in Isreal .He offered rewards for suicide bombers there.Even now today hes using terrorists in suicide bomb attacks against our people.
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 398/763
EXP: 1411078
For next: 74859

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 394 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 31.3.03 0033.21
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0033.29
OK number one, not one politician or general went on TV or said on the record that this whole Iraq thing would be wrapped up in a week. It never happened. People need to realize that wars take TIME. People were spoiled by the Gulf War I and now they think that our military can work those kind of miracles in every armed conflict. But that is not the case, in reality this war is "short" if it lasts six months. The problem is that with this multi network 24 hour news coverage we have now, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox are reporting every single minute detail that paints this picture like "we should be finished with but we arent and heres why." This war is being over analyzed to death by bunch of talking heads and retired generals and admirals. Did some unexpected shit happen? hell yeah. But the people in charge of this expect the unexpected. Thats the business of making war.

And once again let me say that Osama Bin Laden and Al-Quaeda arent the ONLY terror organizations we are fighting in the war on terrorism. Maybe we wont ever see a picture of Osama and Saddam having a beer together but Saddam has been open of his support of terrorists in Isreal .He offered rewards for suicide bombers there.Even now today hes using terrorists in suicide bomb attacks against our people.
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 67

Posts: 366/1136
EXP: 2563349
For next: 29537

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3561 days
Last activity: 3030 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on 31.3.03 0330.37
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0342.16

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    You are so wrapped up in your petty partisain politics, you irrational hatred of Bush, your EGO that you can't possibly aknowlege the good that will come from this war. Thats fine. Go back to your boob tube and your couch, where CNN will tell you the miniscule amount of bad things that happen to our men and women fighting for these people (totally glossing over the overwhelming good that is being done) and keep on bitching, while the people who are willing to go beyond words and good intentions are out doing. You will have a lot to occupy yourselves then, since there will be so very much to whine about.


Yeah, tons of good like the end of terrorism in the world... oh, wait, no, it's pretty much guaranteed to have the opposite effect.

Well, there's always the ensurance of peace in Iraq and good things for the Iraqi people... er, well, no, since we're just as likely to install another dictator, if we even bother to go that far.

Ooo! Ooo! I know! There'll be a whole lot fewer Iraqis around for the next dictator to mistreat, since we're going to have killed shitloads of them. Yay us!



    Protesters- sheesh. Of course, the rash of "Pro-war" protests are totally ignored.


You do, of course, realize that a pro-war "protest" when war is actually occuring is a contradiction in terms, right?



    Then again, with such a small percentage of people protesting AT ALL, I wonder how it can be figured that "the majority of the world" is against this war, based on protests alone. Hey- Democrats love polls, why don't you look at those? Oh, yeah, because they don't agree with your assertions. Oh, too bad then...


Hey, there you go again with the generalizing and paintbrushing. You know, you can make a lot of money doing that to houses. Aluminum siding is so fifties.
messenoir
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 26/449
EXP: 633952
For next: 26217

Since: 20.2.02
From: Columbia, MO

Since last post: 358 days
Last activity: 225 days
AIM:  
#13 Posted on 31.3.03 0521.02
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0525.28
Some articles showing anti-war opposition in other countries. Too tired to find more.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=175
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=681
http://www.asahi.com/english/national/K2003033100342.html
http://rsi.com.sg/en/programmes/wire%20stories/South%20Asia/current.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-War-Syria-US.html

Also, here is at least one article on pro-war demonstrations. Perhaps there are less articles because there are less demonstrations and less people.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-War-Rallies.html

Oh, and this article:

http://archive.columbiatribune.com/2003/Mar/20030329News021.asp

Obviously there are radicals on both sides.

Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 123

Posts: 1187/4700
EXP: 21127892
For next: 103434

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1082 days
Last activity: 878 days
#14 Posted on 31.3.03 0633.35
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0634.26

    Originally posted by Nate The Snake
    I oppose Bush. Whole-heartedly. I don't think he should even be in office, as blatantly corrupt as his administration has demonstrated itself to be.

Thus boiling it down to what the anti-war crowd is really about...
Ubermonkeys
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 558/784
EXP: 1470885
For next: 15052

Since: 2.1.02
From: Michigan

Since last post: 3331 days
Last activity: 3205 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on 31.3.03 0702.30
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0703.25
So... Nate is against the war. Bush sent us to war.

And the big revelation from Grimis is that Nate, part of the "anti-war crowd", doesn't like the guy that sent us to war.

YOU WIN THE JACKPOT, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!


Also, "Thus boiling it down to what the anti-war crowd is really about..." is an unfair generalization. I imagine if you look hard enough, you could find people that like/support Bush as a president, but oppose the idea of war, making them part of the "crowd". I just don't think *everyone* is that absolute in their opinions. That's just an assumption on my part, but I think it's a fair one.

I'm certainly not doubting that the war has given people who oppose Bush more ammunition to express their dislike, though. That's obvious. It did take a war to get everybody up in arms about Bush, though. There wasn't near this amount of complaining from Hollywood towards/about Bush before war became an issue, which has seemingly affected you enough to add that spiffy little pic to your sig. Hmm... maybe some people out there really just didn't want to go to war!

Also, in regards to Nate, if we're going to start throwing our hands up in the air every time a politican presents himself/herself to be corrupt, we might as well all just stop voting now. We can bitch about it, but I'm guessing it'll be a long, long time before the United States has a president that can enter and leave office without some sort of dirty shit on his/her hands.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 123

Posts: 1189/4700
EXP: 21127892
For next: 103434

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1082 days
Last activity: 878 days
#16 Posted on 31.3.03 0718.26
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0728.01

    Originally posted by Ubermonkeys
    There wasn't near this amount of complaining from Hollywood towards/about Bush before war became an issue, which has seemingly affected you enough to add that spiffy little pic to your sig.

Umm....how many times do the Streisands, Baldwins, and Sarandons of the the world have to complain about Bush before it becomes painfully obious that they are anti-Bush. Remember, before the war Stresiand(just to name the most egregious offender) was writing memos to Sen. Daschle on ways to stop the Bush Agenda(her memo was rife with typos incidentally).

Hollywood, generally, is anti-Bush. Sure, there are people like Bruce Willis, Charlton Heston, and Tom Selleck that are GOP guys and Bush supporters. But most of Hollywood spews leftist drivel and was anti-Bush before the war.
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 67

Posts: 370/1136
EXP: 2563349
For next: 29537

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3561 days
Last activity: 3030 days
AIM:  
#17 Posted on 31.3.03 0734.22
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0735.39

    Originally posted by Ubermonkeys
    Also, in regards to Nate, if we're going to start throwing our hands up in the air every time a politican presents himself/herself to be corrupt, we might as well all just stop voting now. We can bitch about it, but I'm guessing it'll be a long, long time before the United States has a president that can enter and leave office without some sort of dirty shit on his/her hands.


It'll be a long, long time, and it's been a long, long time. That doesn't mean that it's okay to just let it happen. If this shit didn't get brought up and kept in people's minds, it'd just fade away once the next shiny thing comes along. Fuck that. Corruption is corruption, and admitting that it'll take a long time to change it is no reason to stop pointing it out.
Ubermonkeys
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 559/784
EXP: 1470885
For next: 15052

Since: 2.1.02
From: Michigan

Since last post: 3331 days
Last activity: 3205 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on 31.3.03 0747.20
Reposted on: 31.3.10 0753.08
I didn't say it didn't exist, I said there wasn't near the amount that there is now. I'm also not saying that the ones who complained before aren't anti-Bush. I don't think anybody paid much mind to Streisand and the like because nobody likes Streisand.

What I did say was that the big wave didn't come until the war became an issue. I don't think the amount of complaining the a celebrity does means as much as how *many* are voicing their opinions... which leads me to believe that there are people that just plain don't like war, especially under the circumstances for this one. I think there are people who started speaking up about the war BECAUSE of the war and not just because they hated Bush, and if they do hate Bush now, it might just be because of the war. They go hand in hand now.

Anyhow, you ignored everything else I said, so I'll just walk away with a smile and assume you agree.
godking
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 21/274
EXP: 293861
For next: 14252

Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3718 days
Last activity: 3663 days
#19 Posted on 4.4.03 0107.54
Reposted on: 4.4.10 0110.14
OK number one, not one politician or general went on TV or said on the record that this whole Iraq thing would be wrapped up in a week. It never happened.

Richard Perle, recently resigned chairman of the Defense Policy Board, in a PBS interview July 11, 2002:

"Saddam is much weaker than we think he is. He's weaker militarily. We know he's got about a third of what he had in 1991."

Ken Adelman, former U.N. ambassador, in an Op-Ed for the Washington Post, Feb. 13, 2002:

"I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: (1) It was a cakewalk last time; (2) they've become much weaker; (3) we've become much stronger; and (4) now we're playing for keeps.

Vice President Dick Cheney, on NBC's "Meet the Press" March 16:

"The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but that they want to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that...My guess is even significant elements of the Republican Guard are likely as well to want to avoid conflict with the U.S. forces and are likely to step aside."

Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a breakfast meeting March 4, 2003:

"What you'd like to do is have it be a short, short conflict. The best way to do that is have such a shock on the system, the Iraqi regime would have to assume early on the end is inevitable."

That took me less than five minutes on Google. I assure you, there's LOTS more of it where that came from.

Even now today hes using terrorists in suicide bomb attacks against our people.

Newsflash: when soldiers attack other soldiers, it's not terrorism. Terrorism isn't defined by your methods - the kamikaze pilots of Japan in World War II weren't terrorists. Terrorists are defined by their targets, namely civilians. If you attack soldiers, they're perfectly valid military targets.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 313/518
EXP: 789829
For next: 33719

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 373 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#20 Posted on 4.4.03 1125.12
Reposted on: 4.4.10 1128.08
"The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but that they want to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that...My guess is even significant elements of the Republican Guard are likely as well to want to avoid conflict with the U.S. forces and are likely to step aside."

Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a breakfast meeting March 4, 2003:

Marines Say 2,500 Iraqi Guards Surrender (story.news.yahoo.com)

Newsflash: when soldiers attack other soldiers, it's not terrorism. Terrorism isn't defined by your methods - the kamikaze pilots of Japan in World War II weren't terrorists. Terrorists are defined by their targets, namely civilians. If you attack soldiers, they're perfectly valid military targets.
Click Here (foxnews.com)
So I guess that the Iraq military are using pregent women now as foot soldiers.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: The Only Man Who Can Lead Post War Iraq
Next thread: What can't leftists be more like this Iraqi
Previous thread: On politicians and wars
(1675 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - A funny quote, and a question about IranRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.238 seconds.